Month: September 2014

My favorite psychiatrist (after Ben Goldacre of course)- Simon Wessely- just admitted that people with severe mental illness are dying much earlier than they should. However, he fails to see that it is perhaps the gradual poisoning of the vital organs, and damage to the nervous system and brain, from years on the psychiatric drug merry-go round, which is cutting the lives of psychiatric patients short. This (mis) treatment is literally killing psychiatric patients. Has Wessely not seen the state of someone after years on psychiatric medications? I was only on them for 4 years in my twenties and I was in bits afterwards, I literally hobbled like an old man at 25, had muscle spasms and I looked and felt like crap. It took me years to recover after the horrors of Seroxat but I am so thankful that I came of it when I did, I can only imagine how messed up I would be had I stayed on it and not gotten away from the psychiatric system. Sadly, I have met people who have been on these drugs for decades and I can say with all honesty that these people were utterly destroyed from psych meds. One friend of mine was prescribed Seroxat for 15 years, can you imagine that? He lost his hair, he became a virtual recluse, agoraphobic, he became infertile, lost his sex drive and had long term emotional blunting and anhedonia for years after, he will never ever be well again. Another former co-worker of mine was under psychiatic care for years, in and out of psych wards with various diagnoses and cocktails of drugs, she was prescribed the dreaded Zypexa. The last time I saw her I didn’t recognize her, such was the state that horrid drug left her in- she had tardive dyskenesia (basically her neurons were fried from it). Her weight had increased dramatically. Her tongue would dart in and out of her mouth like a lizard and she looked like death. She will never be well again. Long term psych drug users end up drooling messes and shells of their former selves, some of them end up brain damaged from the drugs (particularly the anti-psychotics). Robert Whitaker covered all this in his groundbreaking book , ‘an anatomy of an epidemic’, has Wessely not read this important book?

We need shrinks in hospital emergency rooms

It’s time to abandon mind-body duality in medicine: we need psychiatrists in hospitals and better physical care for psychiatric patients, says Simon Wessely

Why do you think psychiatry needs to be better integrated with general medicine?
In the UK, psychiatrists tend to work out of separate mental health hospitals. If the goal were to split physical and mental health, the National Health Service could not be organised better. Yet most illnesses are not so easily divided. And the evidence that psychological treatments can have an impact on physical disorders is growing.

Could you give an example?
Take heart attacks. What could be more perfectly physical? But depression actually has a greater influence than smoking on your chances of surviving the following 12 months. Also, in cardiac clinics, many people come in with what looks like heart disease but turns out to be panic attacks.

So what needs to change?
We need liaison psychiatrists, which basically means you have an embassy of psychiatry in the middle of the acute general hospital. It deals with all the kinds of psychological and social problems associated with a busy hospital: depression in people with cancer, for instance, dementia in old people or problems in the accident and emergency department (A&E).

We’re putting better psychiatric services in at King’s, but we also want to get more physical care to those on the other side of the road, because we know that people with severe mental illness are dying much earlier than they should.

Are you optimistic this can happen?
Things are already changing. The number of liaison psychiatrists is increasing and junior doctors are getting more training in psychiatry. But we still need to do more to bring psychiatry into the heart of medicine, where it belongs.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Psychiatrists on standby”

Profile

Simon Wessely is a psychiatrist at the Maudsley Hospital in London and the new president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. He has spent most of his career highlighting psychological influences on physical health

Posted on Friday 19 September 2014

After months of anticipation, a Chinese court found the GlaxoSmithKline subsidiary in China guilty of bribing doctors, hospital officials and other non-government personnel, and fined the drug maker more than $490 million, The Wall Street Journal reports. This becomes the largest such penalty levied on a company in China. At the same time, Mark Reilly, the former head of the Glaxo unit in China, pleaded guilty to bribery-related charges and was given a three-year suspended sentence. There are varying reports, however, whether he will be deported or required to remain during that time. Four other senior Glaxo managers in China also received suspended sentences of between two and four years…

The court decisions cap a tumultuous episode for Glaxo, which was already struggling to restore its image and revamp business practices in the wake of a $3 billion settlement with U.S. authorities two years ago. The drug maker had been accused of failing to disclose clinical trial data for certain medicines and improperly marketing drugs, among other things.

Andrew Witty, the Glaxo chief executive, issued a brief statement: “Reaching a conclusion in the investigation of our Chinese business is important, but this has been a deeply disappointing matter for GSK. We have and will continue to learn from this. GSK has been in China for close to a hundred years and we remain fully committed to the country and its people.” [here is the official apology, too]…

Glaxo previously acknowledged investigating claims employees bribed doctors in Poland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Meanwhile, the FBI and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission are probing its activities in China. As part of a probe into the pharmaceutical industry, U.S. authorities have been eyeing its overseas dealings since 2010 for possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. And the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office is also conducting an investigation…

Lest you are feeling sorry for Sir Andrew Witty and GlaxoSmithKline, you might want to check out this bio from Forbes with his 2012 Financials:

Sir Andrew Witty, 31 January 2008 and as Chief Executive Officer on 21 May 2008. Sir Andrew joined GSK in 1985. He has worked in the UK, South Africa, the USA and Singapore in various senior roles. In 2003, he was appointed President of GSK Europe and joined GSK’s Corporate Executive Team. In 2003 he was awarded the Public Service Medal by the Government of Singapore and in August 2012 was also awarded the Public Service Star. In the 2012 New Year Honours list, he was awarded a Knighthood for services to the economy and to the UK pharmaceutical industry. He served as the Lead Non-Executive Board member for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills to December 2013. He was also President of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations until July 2013.

Salary

$1,033,000

Bonus

$905,000

All other compensation

$49,000

Non-equity incentive plan compensation

$1,905,000

Total Compensation

$3,892,000

And if you’re a stickler for dates, you might notice that his Presidency of the EFPIA [European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations] ended in July 2013 which happens to be right after the damning leaked memo [a closing argument…, in the shadows…] outlining their plan to undermine the EMA [European Medicines Agency] Data Transparency efforts [which may have succeeded] [see abuzz over there…, a coup d’état…].

Ed goes on to tally up Sir Andrew’s assets column:

It is worth noting that Witty has now spent half of his six-year tenure trying to overhaul business practices, and has still more fines and investigations to show for his efforts. Granted, cultural differences require varying approaches to success around the world, and Glaxo is not the only drug maker facing this challenge. But Glaxo is now something of a poster child for scandal.

Witty has made headway in other areas. In particular, he has won kudos for his push to make clinical trial data more readily accessible to researchers, a move that has helped Glaxo deflect much of the criticism leveled at the pharmaceutical industry otherwise. In trying to resolve this highly contentious issue, he placed himself and Glaxo in a leadership position. And Witty is cutting ties between compensation for sales reps and the number of prescriptions that doctors write for Glaxo drugs

Whether he emerges unscathed by the latest developments in China – and unfolding events elsewhere – remains to be seen, of course. But Witty may need to have Glaxo executives practice some of the self-criticism that Chinese Communist Party leaders preach as a path toward rehabilitation.

I am in a less forgiving mood. It’s impossible for me to imagine that he wasn’t involved in that EFPIA plan to undermine Data Transparency, even if publicly, “he has won kudos for his push to make clinical trial data more readily accessible to researchers, a move that has helped Glaxo deflect much of the criticism leveled at the pharmaceutical industry otherwise.” Enough already with his double dealing!

And the share holders and little people have to pay huge. What is the real story on why executives (of most any company) have the ability to privately acquire great wealth yet have the public pay for their massive screw ups and foolish risk taking?

According to industry outsiders, we are all guilty because we cashed our GSK checks while this mess was going on. If you don’t believe me, ask a headhunter that specializes in new business development, or high-paid salespeople or managers how often employers hire ex-GSK field force members. Be prepared to get sick.

Second point: we got hit for a record $3B fine because of unethical promotion and behaviors. How can you justify suppression of AEs, or promotion of a drug for indications that we KNEW would never get approved? We’re unethical, period. So tell me again how some namby-pamby Bullshit so-called “diversity campaign” is ruining our company? It’s because of OUR past behaviors that our exalted leaders (PUKE!) signed on to Patient First, easily one of the biggest fiascos in an industry loaded with negative press in the past 15 years. Its because of OUR past practices that we even NEED this BS diversity initiative. Its because of OUR current practice of Patient First that the next 12 months is going to be horrific.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Politics? Where the hell do you think the CIA, PF and all the diversity mandates came from, the Romney Justice a Department. Having regrets about voting for the absolute worst president in history TWICE?

NOW we’re finally getting to the real reason of your many months’ worth of diatribes. I had a feeling that you had an ulterior motive! Look Bucko, we brought those idiotic policies on ourselves. Cant you get that? The Industry (but especially us and Pfizer) earned those damned massive fines BECAUSE OF THE WRONG that we heaped on the American public. For Pete’s sake, show some accountability! That CIA? Our fault. PF? Some idiotic agency’s idea that was agreed to by our leadership. How many children did we harm by pushing Paxil for unapproved indications? How many patients were hurt because WE shelved “bad” data showing AEs or inferiority to current therapies? The POTUS (current or past) didn’t do that. WE DID! GSK, baby, all the way!

Really, your fake posts, the lies about attorney offices contacting you, the responding to your own posts (while pretending to be someone else), the pushing of us to file with the EEOC, the pretending to be someone that’s witnessed Negros (although I’m pretty sure you call them something else) and others violate policies and go untouched….all of this speaks to someone that has an agenda and is willing to be duplicitous to achieve that agenda.

I’ve never said or thought this about anyone before, but it is my hope, sir, that you rot on the unemployment line for 18 months when we have our next round of cuts. That way you’ll get a taste of what other industries think of us. And maybe you’ll feel guilty that SOME of your hostility needs to be aimed at our C suite for their ineptitude, lack of moral fiber. This diversity crap is small potatoes compared to what really ails this company specifically, and the industry as a whole.

Glaxo Found Guilty of Bribery in China: Can Witty Rehabilitate the Drug Maker?

After months of anticipation, a Chinese court found the GlaxoSmithKlineGSK.LN+0.90% subsidiary in China guilty of bribing doctors, hospital officials and other non-government personnel, and fined the drug maker more than $490 million, The Wall Street Journal reports. This becomes the largest such penalty levied on a company in China.

At the same time, Mark Reilly, the former head of the Glaxo unit in China, pleaded guilty to bribery-related charges and was given a three-year suspended sentence. There are varying reports, however, whether he will be deported or required to remain in China during that time. Four other senior Glaxo managers in China also received suspended sentences of between two and four years.

As we have noted previously, the drug maker had been accused of running a bribery network in China that was designed to boost drug sales. As part of the scheme, Glaxo employees allegedly bribed physicians and hospital staff members, while channeling kickbacks through travel agencies and trade groups, among others.

The court decisions cap a tumultuous episode for Glaxo, which was already struggling to restore its image and revamp business practices in the wake of a $3 billion settlement with U.S. authorities two years ago. The drug maker had been accused of failing to disclose clinical trial data for certain medicines and improperly marketing drugs, among other things.

Andrew Witty, the Glaxo chief executive, issued a brief statement: “Reaching a conclusion in the investigation of our Chinese business is important, but this has been a deeply disappointing matter for GSK. We have and will continue to learn from this. GSK has been in China for close to a hundred years and we remain fully committed to the country and its people.” (here is the official apology, too).

Despite the contrition, pressure may be mounting on Witty, who has repeatedly emphasized the China and other so-called emerging markets are key to Glaxo growth. As the Journal points out, some investors are starting to question his overall performance and whether the scandal in China may represent a systemic problem.

Indeed, Glaxo previously acknowledged investigating claims employees bribed doctors in Poland, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Meanwhile, the FBI and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission are probing its activities in China. As part of a probe into the pharmaceutical industry, U.S. authorities have been eyeing its overseas dealings since 2010 for possible violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

It is worth noting that Witty has now spent half of his six-year tenure trying to overhaul business practices, and has still more fines and investigations to show for his efforts. Granted, cultural differences require varying approaches to success around the world, and Glaxo is not the only drug maker facing this challenge. But Glaxo is now something of a poster child for scandal.

Witty has made headway in other areas. In particular, he has won kudos for his push to make clinical trial data more readily accessible to researchers, a move that has helped Glaxo deflect much of the criticism leveled at the pharmaceutical industry otherwise. In trying to resolve this highly contentious issue, he placed himself and Glaxo in a leadership position.

Whether he emerges unscathed by the latest developments in China – and unfolding events elsewhere – remains to be seen, of course. But Witty may need to have Glaxo executives practice some of the self-criticism that Chinese Communist Party leaders preach as a path toward rehabilitation.

Friday, September 19, 2014

GSK Plead Guilty For Being “Very Decent”

Earlier today GSK issued an apology to the people of China, to my knowledge this is the first time an apology has been issued from anyone at GSK – Let’s face it, they have a pretty dubious history with regard to a number of their drugs causing birth defects, homicide, suicide and heart attacks. No apology has ever been given to victims of Paxil or Avandia.

The apology, which can be read in full here, comes as a result of GSK pleading guilty and being handed down a fine of 3 billion yuan ($488.8 million) in the Changsha Intermediate People’s Court in Hunan Province earlier today.

The ringleader, or mastermind behind the whole bribery network, Mark Reilly, was given a three year suspended prison sentence and, according to various media reports, will be deported from China.

The one-day trial, held in secrecy, saw a total of four years in sentencing handed down to Reilly and four other managers, Zhang Guowei, Zhao Hongyan, Liang Hong and Huang Hong, all of whom worked for GSK. According to the New York Times, all but one of the sentences was suspended.

According to the court report, “it (the court) had taken into account that he (Reilly) had returned from Britain to face the investigators, and that he had “truthfully recounted the crimes of his employer,” meriting a relatively lenient punishment”

This must come as a kick in the teeth for Peter Humprey and his wife, Yu Yinzeng, who were jailed back in August for trafficking 256 pieces of personal information between 2009 and 2013.

Humprey’s firm, ChinaWhys, had previously been hired by GSK China to look into allegations of wrong-doing by Mark Reilly. Humphrey’s son, Harvey, has maintained all along that GSK were to blame for his father’s incarceration at the hands of the Chinese. This from the UK Telegraph…

“They said the allegations were untrue,” said Harvey. “Then two weeks later they said actually these things did happen. My father would have changed the conditions of the investigation if he had known. He would have investigated the allegations instead of this one person. I do not think as an investigator you would have taken the risk of investigating a whistleblower before you investigated the allegations.”

GSK has insisted that an initial investigation into the claims “did not find evidence to substantiate the specific allegations made in the whistleblower emails”.

“When I saw my dad last Friday, I mentioned GSK once. I mentioned Reilly to him once. He expressed a very low opinion of Reilly.”

I’m kind of surprised at the leniency of the Chinese authorities. The reason, they claim, they were so lenient was because Reilly had returned to China and had “truthfully recounted the crimes of his employer” – his employer?

I’m confused, wasn’t it Reilly who carried out the crimes unbeknownst to his employer, GSK?

Perfect timing for the trial too. The British press are all over the Scottish ‘yes’ or ‘no’ votes so any news that GSK have been pleading guilty to crimes committed in China will have less column inches in the British media. It would be interesting to find out who decided the date of the trial.

Late last year Glaxo CEO Andrew Witty accompanied British Prime Minister David Cameron on a “Business” trip to China.

Let’s just take a look at their apology to the people of China again to see how “very decent” their behaviour was…

“Following a comprehensive investigation by the Chinese judicial authorities, GSK China Investment Co. Ltd (GSKCI) has been identified according to Chinese law to have offered money or property to non-government personnel in order to obtain improper commercial gains, and has been found guilty of bribing non-government personnel.

Very decent?

I don’t know what David Cameron’s definition of the word ‘decent’ is but to assign it to GSK is borderline madness!

I’m in no doubt that Cameron was influential in helping Reilly escape jail time, no doubt at all.

So, will Reilly, once deported, be arrested when he sets foot back on British soil?

I guess that’s a job for the UK’s Serious Fraud Office who, earlier this year, announced that they would be investigating GlaxoSmithKline as a result of the Chinese allegations – well, they aren’t allegations any more, Glaxo have, today, pleaded guilty.

If you think that the UK’s Serious Fraud Office will be standing at Heathrow with handcuffs to arrest Reilly then you may be mistaken, if anything, it will be David Cameron and Andrew Witty that will greet Reilly with open arms… “Well done old chum, our shares are back on the rise”.

Meantime, 100 or so plaintiffs in the UK face disappointment after GSK have refused to pay out compensation to them for suffering severe withdrawal reactions to the antidepressant Seroxat [known as Paxil in the US]. This, despite settling over 3,000 cases of Paxil addiction in the US.

The pharma firm’s former China boss is said to escape jail time as GSK tries to draw a line under a “deeply disappointing” matter.

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has been fined almost £300m by a court in China – a record in the country – for bribing health officials to use its products.

The pharmaceutical firm confirmed the £297m penalty imposed by the Changsha Intermediate People’s Court in Hunan Province, saying it accepted that illegal activities took place and the fine would be paid through existing cash resources.

The Chinese state news agency, Xinhua, reported that the former head of GSK in China and other executives faced jail terms but a GSK source told Sky News that Mark Reilly was to be deported after being handed a three-year suspended sentence.

The company’s statement said the court found that “GSK China Investment (GSKCI) …offered money or property to non-government personnel in order to obtain improper commercial gains.

Mark Reilly used to run GSKCI

“The illegal activities of GSKCI are a clear breach of GSK’s governance and compliance procedures; and are wholly contrary to the values and standards expected from GSK employees.

“GSK has published a statement of apology to the Chinese government and its people on its website.

“GSK has co-operated fully with the authorities and has taken steps to comprehensively rectify the issues identified at the operations of GSKCI.

“This includes fundamentally changing the incentive programme for its salesforces (decoupling sales targets from compensation); significantly reducing and changing engagement activities with healthcare professionals; and expanding processes for review and monitoring of invoicing and payments.”

GSK chief executive Sir Andrew Witty added: “Reaching a conclusion in the investigation of our Chinese business is important, but this has been a deeply disappointing matter for GSK.

“We have and will continue to learn from this. GSK has been in China for close to a hundred years and we remain fully committed to the country and its people.”

The investigation took a number of twists with a British man, who was hired as an investigator by GSK, being jailed for two years and six months in August.

The Chinese authorities claimed Peter Humphrey illegally obtained Chinese citizens’ personal information and sold it to companies including GSK.

Peter Humphrey’s health is said to be poor

The London-listed firm hired him after an anonymous email, containing a sex tape of Mr Reilly and his Chinese girlfriend, was sent to senior management in January last year.

The email alleged corrupt practices in GSK’s China operation.

GSK’s ethical standards have also been called into question in Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan,Syria and Poland.

Share this:

Like this:

Dr Ian Hudson, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency’s chief executive, said the trial proposal was approved with extraordinary speed: “Our priority is to protect public health. Given the importance of Ebola as a risk to public health in some countries in Africa, we fast-tracked the review of the clinical trial application for this vaccine so that it was assessed and authorised by the MHRA’s experts in just four working days.”

As the MHRA fast-track’s GSK’s experimental Ebola Vaccine through the first human guinea pig trials, the MHRA head (and former GSK employee of 11 years)- Ian Hudson- utters his distinct approval, despite the fact that the infamous side effects of GSK’s Seroxat have never been properly investigated by the regulators. Furthermore, Ian Hudson fails also to mention the outrage over GSK’s exploitation of the Swine Flu hysteria, and the side effects of Narcolepsy with GSK’s Pandemrix vaccine which occurred with that scandal.Also hanging in the air are GSK’s bribery scandals around the world: from China, to Poland, and Iraq to Syria. I wonder are these volunteers aware of GSK’s appalling reputation? (from dodgy dangerous drugs to fraud, corruption and general skullduggery). It will be interesting to see what happens with GSK’s Ebola Vaccine, and what potential side effects might emerge in the future for these brave volunteers. Whatever the outcome, it seems Ian Hudson has no problem endorsing the most corrupt pharmaceutical company on the planet… I suppose it is his former employer after all! When people like Ian Hudson say that their ‘priority is to protect public health’ you really have to laugh (with gallows humor). What he really means is the MHRA’s priority is to protect pharma-wealth. Your health (and mine) is really just as disposable as a lab-test-guinea pig…

A woman in Oxford has become the first British volunteer to be injected with an experimental Ebola vaccine, which, if it works, will be fast-tracked for use in west Africa.

In an unprecedented move, the untested vaccine has already gone into mass production. Some 10,000 doses are being manufactured by the British drug company GlaxoSmithKline, funded by the Wellcome Trust and the UK government, which are also supporting the Oxford trial.

If the vaccine is effective, there will be supplies available to protect thousands of health workers in west Africa, who will be the first to receive it. Nobody wants a repeat of the ZMapp experience – only a dozen doses were available worldwide of the experimental drug and, controversially, they went mostly to foreign medical and aid workers.

The first British volunteer is Ruth Atkins, 48, a communications and engagement manager in the NHS from Marcham in Oxfordshire and a former nurse. She heard on the radio as she was driving home from work that volunteers were needed for a vaccine trial run by Oxford University researchers.

“I volunteered because the situation in west Africa is so tragic and I thought being part of this vaccination process was something small I could do to hopefully make a huge impact,” she said.

One hour after the vaccination, she said: “I feel absolutely fine, it felt no different to being vaccinated before going on holiday.”

Atkins is the first of 60 healthy people who will be vaccinated to find out whether the potential vaccine has any troublesome side effects. Studies involving animals have shown no ill effects so far.

The vaccine was under development by GSK – it was in the portfolio of Okairos, a smaller company bought by GSK last year – before the Ebola outbreak occurred, but it could have taken a decade to get it through the trials and into production.

There is a growing sense of urgency, with the World Bank warning on Wednesday that billions of dollars could be drained from economies in west Africa by the end of next year if the epidemic is not contained. The bank has pledged about $200m in emergency assistance to Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, the three countries worst affected. The US announced on Tuesday it would send 3,000 troops to help tackle the outbreak.

Four trials of the vaccine will take simultaneously to gather enough safety data and early information on the immune response, which is an indication of whether it will protect against the disease.

Ten volunteers have already been injected in the US, where the National Institutes of Health has been funding the development of the vaccine against the Ebola Zaire strain and another against Ebola Sudan. If all goes well, there will also be trials in the Gambia and Mali in healthy volunteers.

It is hoped results from the trials will be available before the end of this year. If the vaccine is effective, it will be given to health workers in Ebola-stricken regions. This will be the only way to find out whether the it really can protect against the disease.

Prof Adrian Hill, director of the Jenner Institute at the University of Oxford, which is running the trial, said: “Witnessing the events in Africa makes it clear that developing new drugs and vaccines against Ebola should now be an urgent priority. It is tremendous that so many people have worked hard to make this trial happen in a short time, and I am enormously grateful to those volunteers who have come forward to take part and to the funders including the Wellcome Trust, DfID, MRC and MHRA for supporting this trial so quickly.

“These are initial safety trials of the vaccine and it will be some time before we know whether the vaccine could protect people against Ebola. But we are optimistic that the candidate vaccine may prove useful against the disease in the future.”

Dr Ian Hudson, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency’s chief executive, said the trial proposal was approved with extraordinary speed: “Our priority is to protect public health. Given the importance of Ebola as a risk to public health in some countries in Africa, we fast-tracked the review of the clinical trial application for this vaccine so that it was assessed and authorised by the MHRA’s experts in just four working days.”

Ebola vaccine trial begins

The vaccine being tested is similar to one being trialed in the United States

A trial of an experimental vaccine against the Ebola virus is to begin in Oxford.

The first of 60 healthy volunteers will be injected with the vaccine.

It contains only a small portion of genetic material from the virus, so it cannot cause the disease.

Normally it would take years of human trials before a completely new vaccine was approved for use.

But such is the urgency of the Ebola outbreak in west Africa that this experimental vaccine is being fast tracked at an astonishing rate.

If the trials are successful, it could be used to immunise health workers in affected areas by the end of the year.

By then, around 10,000 doses should be available.

The vaccine is being developed by GlaxoSmithKline and the US National Institutes of Health.

Immune response

Funding for the trials is coming from the Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council, and the UK Department for International Development.

The Oxford study will aim to establish two things: that the vaccine produces a good immune response in volunteers and with few side-effects.

The vaccine uses a modified chimpanzee common cold virus to carry a single Ebola protein – it cannot trigger either disease, but should prompt the production of antibodies against Ebola.

Professor Adrian Hill, director of the Jenner Institute in Oxford, who is leading the trial, said: “This is a remarkable example of how quickly a new vaccine can be progressed into the clinic, using international co-operation”.

Blood tests from the volunteers will reveal the extent of their antibody response within two to four weeks.

Further volunteers will be given the vaccine in Africa next month and there are trials in the United States of a different formulation – both vaccines could be used if they prove safe and effective.

The accidental release of 45 litres of concentrated live polio virus solution into the environment – Belgium

As reported to ECDC by Belgian authorities, on 2 September 2014, following a human error, 45 litres of concentrated live polio virus solution were released into the environment by the pharmaceutical company, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), in Rixensart city, Belgium. The liquid was conducted directly to a water-treatment plant (Rosieres) and released after treatment in river Lasne affluent of river Dyle which is affluent of the Escaut/Scheldt river

ECDC’s assessment is that the accidental release in the environment of large amounts of live polio virus represents a risk to public health if susceptible populations, such as areas with low polio vaccine coverage, are exposed to contaminated waters or mud. Particularly since the Lasne and Dyle rivers are joining the Escaut/Scheldt river which flows in the southwestern part of the Netherlands where various orthodox protestant communities present a lower polio vaccination coverage, before reaching the North Sea.

Glaxo Consumer Health Unit is Linked to a US Probe In 2012

For the past year, the GlaxoSmithKlinebribery scandal in China has centered on its pharmaceutical business, but newly reviewed documents indicate the drug maker became aware of compliance issues in its consumer health care business as early as 2012, according toReuters.

Glaxo confirmed that it conducted an internal investigation into procurement practices in the consumer unit in China, the news service writes. Although the drug maker tells Reuters there was no sign of “unethical conduct,” it did find “some non-compliance with our procurement procedures.” Glaxo says the inquiry was unrelated to a Chinese criminal investigation into corruption in its pharmaceutical division, which was made public last year.

The investigation focused on specific people and suppliers in China – including some employees, academics and education institutes – and was related to a U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Securities Exchange Commission inquiry into possible violationsof the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, according to Reuters. The law targets illegal payments to foreign government officials used to boost sales.

The news service, which wrote that it reviewed three internal Glaxo notices, stressed that the documents do not amount to evidence of wrongdoing by Glaxo or its business partners. The notices were sent by Glaxo lawyers to employees and e-mailed to senior Glaxo staff in China, according to Reuters, which adds that the drug maker has since cut ties with some suppliers.

A Glaxo spokesman tells Reuters that the notices “related to allegations around adherence to procurement policies within our Chinese consumer healthcare business. We investigated using resources inside and outside the company, and did not find evidence of unethical conduct, but did identify some non-compliance with our procurement procedures and remedial action was taken.”

The disclosure raises questions about Glaxo operations in China that had not previously been in the public spotlight. The drug maker, you may recall, has been coping with turmoil ever since bribery allegations surfaced in China, which is a large and growing market not just for Glaxo, but the entire pharmaceutical industry.

As reported previously, Chinese authorities recently accused the former head of Glaxo operations in China of ordering subordinates, his sales team and other employees to bribe hospitals, health care organizations and others. Separately, the drug maker said it is investigating claims that its employees bribed doctors in Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.

Glaxo has previously acknowledged that some of its Chinese executives may have broken the law, but has maintained there is “zero tolerance” for bribery. We asked Glaxo for comment about this latest report and will update you accordingly.